Understanding a non-revolution
Social Sciences like Psychology have found themselves in a difficult time in recent years. On the one hand, technology, privacy, pandemics, and economic uncertainty make their work more important than ever. The age of information demands answers to questions about the human condition. At the same time, many see these realms of study as archaic, outdated, and unequipped to handle today’s problems.
These critiques come from both without and within. Barbara Spellman wrote of a revolution of the sciences in her 2015 paper on “A Short (Personal) Future History of Revolution 2.0.” Spellman describes two generations of researchers in the field of psychology, who she labels as Generation 1.0 and 2.0. Spellman describes the “revolution” by comparing it to other revolutions:
As with many political revolutions, neither side has behaved well. Generation 2.0 has shouted loudly, pointed fingers, and called for major upheavals. Generation 1.0 has felt threatened by the finger pointing and by worries that psychological science would suffer. And many people have asked “What will happen to my own career if the rules were to be changed now?” -Barbara Spellman
While this makes it seem like there are two opposing forces who unite against each other, this could not be further from the truth. There are none that argue that fields of scientific study shouldn’t grow. People don’t like change, but this doesn’t mean that we reject all change. At the same time, none would argue that Psychology should do away with journals and simply make a forum for all research to be posted publically.
By these extreme examples, it is clear that categorization of all psychologists into 2 groups of thought is just as likely as finding a truly neutral politician, or a unicorn. People cannot be easily categorized, and psychologists — despite popular belief — are people. With that in mind, changing our perspective from a binary to a spectrum is an obvious way we can better represent the current situation.
How many other minor adjustments would better help us to describe the problems sciences like psychology are having? Could the problems psychology is having be solved simply by a change in perspective?
